Watch What Happens When Candace Cameron Bure Drops Major Truth Bomb On ‘View’ Co-Hosts

On Thursday, the University of Texas at Austin announced it would allow students eligible for concealed carry licenses to carry weapons on campus.

The panel on The View expressed outrage over this decision, going so far apparently as to attack the state of Texas as a whole.

“I would rather send my kids to New Zealand than to Texas,” began Joy Behar, presumably criticizing the state of Texas for its gun laws. “That’s how strongly I feel about that, I think it’s the most dangerous state.”

Agreeing with her co-host, Sara Haines continued the attack. “Schools should be little islands of safety. It should be a place where you can express yourself and learn and feel safe. Honestly, I was not my best self during those emotional years, the idea that a bunch of those students who are very impressionable at that age. Those are the last people that we should be putting guns in their hands.”

“There’s a rape culture on campuses,” host Raven Symone added. “And then you’re going to put guns in the hands [of the students]. And then you’re going to put alcohol in the hands [of the students]. And then you’re going to blame them [the students] for something without giving them the right education in the first place. That’s unacceptable.”

But host Candace Cameron Bure reminded her colleagues that the world doesn’t operate on best case scenarios and blind idealism. “I’m okay with it. The reason being is so many of the gun free zones are the places that get attacked. And you do wonder if somebody was armed could less people have been killed in these mass shootings,” she said.

“Also, we have to remember that these ‘children,’ they’re actually adults because they have to be 21 years old to be armed, they are concealed weapons,” Bure continued. “They have to go through the background checks; they have to go through the gun safety to be able to carry them. So this isn’t an 18 year old out of the gate.”


h/t: IJReview

Arrested Professor Claimed Police Racism… Then This Dashcam Video Was Released

When a black studies professor from an Ivy League university was pulled over, what would have been a simple arrest became a maze of allegations.

Professor Imani Perry was arrested for speeding, having a suspended license, as well as open arrest warrant for a three-year-old parking ticket.

“The police treated me inappropriately and disproportionately,” the Princeton professor wrote in a lengthy Facebook post, which she has since taken down. “The fact of my blackness is not incidental to this matter.”

“There are a number of commentators online who have repeated to me an all-too-common formulation: ‘Well, if you hadn’t done anything wrong, this wouldn’t have happened.’ But this demand for behavioral perfection from Black people in response to disproportionate policing and punishment is a terrible red herring,” she wrote.

The Princeton police are not taking criticism from the college and Perry lying down. They released the full 30-minute video that shows Perry’s arrest. The video shows officers speaking calmly and politely to Perry throughout the incident.



“What you’re going to have to do is come with us, it’s $130, so if you have that money we’ll be able to post and we’ll be able to get you right back out,” one officer said to Perry during the video.

Perry was initially stopped for driving 67 mph in a 45 mph zone, according to Capt. Nicholas K. Sutter, the department chief. He said all departmental procedures were followed to the letter in the incident, and that Perry had to be arrested because of the open warrant.

After she arrived at the police station, police handcuffed Perry to a workstation, Sutter said. She texted that she was handcuffed to a desk.

“Every single person brought back there is secured while the officer is processing,” he said, adding that exceptions were made if for injured suspects. He said the process during which Perry would have been handcuffed usually lasts 15 minutes. He said she was at the station for about an hour.

“I don’t want to sound in any way like I am being defensive or arguing that Dr. Perry is not entitled to feel the way she does,” Sutter said. “We are part of the larger law enforcement community in our current times in law enforcement. Therefore I understand how in this climate we can be perceived to be a microcosm of that.”

h/t: TheBlaze

BREAKING: Deadly High School Shooting Reportedly Claims Multiple Victims

Two teenagers were shot Friday at an Arizona high school and at least one of them is dead. One media account said both victims are female.

The shootings took place at Independent High School in Glendale, Ariz. about 10 miles northwest of Phoenix. KNXV reported Friday that the incident took place at 8 a.m. local time in a patio area of the school’s campus. KNXV video taken from the air showed police and fire crews surrounding what appeared to be one of the shooting victims.

“Parent telling us – 2 sophomore girls involved in double shooting,” reported Juston Preza on Twitter.

KNXV reported that a source told the station that two female students were in an “altercation” and that the incident ended in gunshots.

Officials said there was no active shooter, and that other students were not in danger, although the school was reported on lockdown. Police said they are not looking for a suspect in the shootings.

“Your children are safe and this is not a dangerous situation,” Glendale police spokeswoman Tracey Breeden said. Traffic has been closed off in the area around the school. Parents of students at the school have been asked to wait at a nearby Walmart until police clear the scene of the shooting.

Breeden said the people involved in the shooting were teens but could not say if they were students at the 2,000-student high school.

Glendale Mayor tweeted:

h/t: Fox News

Lib College Employee Threatens Pro-Life Man With The Unthinkable- Many Want Him Fired

A staff member at Purdue University allegedly threatened to rape the family of a pro-life supporter in response to a campaign a student group ran on campus last week to raise awareness about the high abortion rate in African American community.

Last week, the Purdue Students for Life put up flyers and chalked messages around campus meant to raise awareness about the problem.

Jamie Newman, an employee for the university who works in the Visual and Performing Arts Department, commented on a blog post by the Students for Life group explaining the purpose of their campaign. “You folks are vile, racist idiots, who richly deserve all the opprobrium that will be heaped on you as a result of this unbelievably thoughtless, stupid escapade,” Newman wrote.  

He added, “And that you should have pulled this stunt at the beginning of Black History Month suggests you are either epically clueless or profoundly malicious. So, which is [it] — embarrassingly dumb or simply evil.”

Not content to vent his anger at the pro-life students on the college blog, Newman threatened rape against a pro-life supporter while commenting on a Live Action News blog post. Responding to a comment by someone named Tom, Newman wrote:

Oh, I’m sorry. So, let me make my intentions quite explicit: I did in fact offer to rape Tom’s wife/daughter/great grandmother. Free of charge, even. I’m generous that way. Here’s the number for the West Lafayette Police Department: 765-775-5500. Here’s the number for the local FBI office: 765-435-5619. Drop that dime! I could strike at any minute. *giggles* (like a girl).

Image Credit: Student for Life

Image Credit: Student for Life

In a statement obtained by Campus Reform, Purdue University said it is investigating the comments left by “jamiegnewman.”

“Obviously, a threat of rape is outside the bounds of any definition of protected speech. Due process requires that, before taking any action, we verify the alleged facts and give this staff member the chance to explain himself if he can,” Assistant Vice President for Strategic Communications Julie Rosa told Campus Reform. “Needless to say, the statements, as alleged, are reprehensible and unacceptable in the eyes of the entire Purdue community.”

The Purdue Students for Life published an open letter to the campus community on Thursday defending the overall purpose of their campaign, while also apologizing for co-oping language from the Black Lives Matter movement. Regarding the targeting of African Americans for abortion, the group wrote:

This is not a matter of political opinion — it’s simply about numbers. Abortion rates for African-Americans are up to five times higher than those of the white population. In New York City, for instance, black children are more likely to be aborted than to be born — for every 1000 births, 1180 children are aborted (source: New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene).

This happens in part because black communities are being targeted by the abortion industry and propagandized to believe that the preborn are subhuman. They are taught that abortion centers such as Planned Parenthood are the only source of reproductive healthcare, and are not offered the support they need to parent. This routine of systematic misinformation is worthy of being brought to the attention of our academic environment.

h/t: Conservative Review 

Sorry, Bernie: Tuition Free ≠ Debt Free

With the 2016 New Hampshire Democratic Primary just around the corner and scores of college-aged voters up for grabs, affordable public college education has become a key selling point for Bernie Sanders. The Sanders plan to “Make College Tuition-Free and Debt-Free proposes offering free tuition at public colleges and universities, lowering interest rates on current and future student loans, meeting 100 percent of low-income students’ financial needs, and tripling the federal work-study program. As with most government handouts, the Sanders plan will likely cost more and deliver less than it promises.

Let’s start with the cost estimates for free public higher education. Virtually every advocate of free tuition references an article in The Atlantic from January 2014, which estimates the cost at roughly $62.6 billion. Sanders, factoring in his additional proposals, predicts closer to $75 billion. Two-thirds of his plan would be federally funded via new taxes on Wall Street speculators, with states contributing the remainder.

The problem with these calculations is that they are based on static projections for tuition costs. If this assumption proves faulty, the actual cost of implementing the Sanders plan will balloon. And there are three good reasons to expect an increase in tuition costs.

First, history suggests that tuition will continue to rise. Tuition rates have been gradually increasing over past decades, with students now paying 3.22 times more than in 1985 [See Figure 6, p. 18]. The Sanders plan will likely exasperate this trend because it will remove any incentive for public institutions to slow these increases.

Second, any reduction in current sources of revenue would likely require increases in tuition rates to cover the shortfall. For example, a large portion of public college budgets are governmentally funded through grants, tax benefits, and work-study programs. In 2014, state aid and local taxes cumulatively contributed $81.6 billion in these areas. Cuts to state or local budgets could result in less revenue for public colleges and universities, which would have to be offset by higher tuition rates.

Most public institutions also depend on revenue from hospitals, auxiliary enterprises, private gifts, investment income, and other educational activities. These sources contributed $80 billion—or one-third of total revenue—to public institutions (four-year, two-year, and less than two-year) in 2012. Although these programs are generally self-sustaining, the amount of revenue they generate is not guaranteed. Unexpected revenue deficits in these areas could also result in tuition hikes, costs ultimately saddled onto the taxpayer under the Sanders plan.

Third, the advent of free tuition will provide a powerful incentive for students to enroll in public colleges and universities. Whether motivating those who never before considered college to finally enroll, or incentivizing private college students to switch to the public sector, or a combination of both, the result will be the same—a significant increase in the cost of offering free tuition, well above estimates based on static enrollments in public institutions.

As faulty as Sander’ cost estimates appear, perhaps the more troubling aspect of his plan is its false promise of eliminating student loan debt. The cost of college attendance includes far more than just tuition. In fact, fully half of public college students’ expenditures remains room and board. The College Board reports the average published tuition rate for public four-year in-state students as $9,410, while the corresponding price of room and board is $10,138. Textbooks are another significant cost of attendance, with the average public undergraduate student paying $1,200 annually.

Admittedly, many public institution students attend a community college or commute, which minimizes room and board costs but does not eliminate them entirely. If only tuition is covered by government, students will still require loans to pay for their textbooks, room, and board, and many will remain weighed down with debt. While promising to provide a post-secondary panacea, Sanders merely increases government spending without lifting students’ financial burdens.

Before enacting a new federal entitlement, the American people deserve a more careful accounting of its costs. As currently written, the price tag of the Sanders plan is simply not as affordable as its proponents claim. College-aged voters would do well to look past the tirades against Wall Street speculators and demand more details—details such as exactly what services will be “free,” meticulous analysis of the plan’s financial assumptions, and specifics regarding how unexpected costs will be funded. They might be surprised to learn that the so-called free lunch they are being offered costs far more than suggested—and it doesn’t really taste that good, either.

– See more at: